The person I was talking to from NFNP thinks that it is NOT a u-boat pen but a model to check the strengths of concrete against bombs??? none of this is proven yet.
... it is NOT a u-boat pen but a model to check the strengths of concrete against bombs??? none of this is proven yet.
From Norman Parker and Anthony Pasmore's Ashley Walk:
Bombing trials were not confined to air delivered weapons. Reference has been made to the Ministry of Home Security Target built in the centre of the HE section of the range. Generally referred to as the 'submarine pen' the target was a massive and costly construction of similar pattern to the German installations, but built to be blown up. What was required was the experience of damage to this type of structure resulting from aerial bombardment.
The target was completed in May 1941 ... many unsuccessful attempts to bomb it ... little impression on the concrete ... direct contact caused only superficial damage ... subsequently it was easier to bury it.
Plan A is always more effective when the problem you are working on understands that Plan B will involve the use of dynamite
That is was built for the Ministry for Home Security is a clue to it's original purpose. I suspect any tests carried out were copied to all the other interested Ministries as well. There is a lot at TNA on the Anti-Concrete Committees held throughout the war and no doubt this particular structure is referred to in one of the 1940/41 committees. The history of these committees would probably fill a book and be reasonably interesting I suspect.
No Amount Of Evidence Will Ever Persuade An Idiot (probably not Mark Twain)
I was only quoting what I was told, I then quoted to him from From Norman Parker and Anthony Pasmore's book. And still had the same reply, not a u-boat pen?????
Just because its quoted in a book does not make it fact, as I have said the opposite, does not make my words fact, but we have to now open our minds that it may not be a U-boat pen and PNK answers this side of the argument (I know its discussion not an argument).
Richard, have you been on Ashley Walk with your shovel and uncovered it whilst hidden from view by the mist? I think the Tumuli might be as a result of OS using aerial photo evidence and not ground level knowledge.
The only real resolution to the sub pen question is written evidence from the time, if it exists. TNA has this (see below) listed but it may be nothing to do with the Tumili in question, otherwise a trawl through the Anti-Concrete files may be required.
Department of Scientific and Industrial Research: Road Research Laboratory Reports. REPORTS TO MINISTRY OF HOME SECURITY. Construction of a R.C. shelter at Ashley Walk. The control of concrete quality. By A.R. Collins. C Not applicable.
Collection: Records created or inherited by the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, and related bodies
Date range:01 January 1942 - 31 January 1942
Reference DSIR 27/29/ARP315
Subjects:Road transport, Research
(No idea what an R.C. shelter is in this context but my curiosity my require me to add it to my list for my next visit)
No Amount Of Evidence Will Ever Persuade An Idiot (probably not Mark Twain)
Dear all I am pleased with the discussion, I was at a meeting and the NF bloke and I were talking about Ashley walk and the (Mound) and I said "the U-boat Pen" and that is when he started to disagree with me and saying it may or was not a pen. To me its U-boat pen.
Richard, have you been on Ashley Walk with your shovel and uncovered it whilst hidden from view by the mist?
If you do look at my website you will see a small bit of concrete that I did help to uncover a bit more than the rabbits in the are, but not enough to see much.
I think you may have nailed it with the TNA reports.
The other part of this, that would have been interesting is. All that concrete in 1942 that was used at Ashley walk could have been used for airfield building. Somebody rather high up must have been given the go ahead to dig out a vast area of heath and make this very strong structure.
I still think the Tumuli is a sort of double bluff on the part of the OS and the government, a bit like some airfields being removed from OS maps.
The MoHS Target is described in detail together with a drawing in Norman's book. Based on structures discovered by RAF recce flights along the French coast, it was built by Morlands at a cost £0.25M. He states, '... its more commonly used name "The Submarine Pens" survives in use among local people today.
Plan A is always more effective when the problem you are working on understands that Plan B will involve the use of dynamite
We use cookies to improve our website and your experience when using it. Cookies used for the essential operation of this site have already been set. By continuing to use this site you are agreeing to this. To find out more about the cookies we use and how to delete them, see our privacy policy.
I think the Tumuli might be as a result of OS using aerial photo evidence and not ground level knowledge.
![[IMG]/community/117526=10914-F01-3041_RAF SU 17669 10197 -ZOOM-525.jpg[/img]](/community/117526=10914-F01-3041_RAF%20SU%2017669%2010197%20-ZOOM-525.jpg){kind=link}
